Justification for the methods

This section provides justification for the choice of methods in this research using academic literature to describe the method and its advantages and disadvantages. For each method, the implications for the research design are then provided, which relate directly to the planned fieldwork activity and the preliminary analysis. These implications directly relate to the detail provided in Section 4.4 where the methods are described against the research questions.

Document analysis

Discourse analysis, or more specifically document analysis, is crucial to building an understanding of the decision making process and the power given to public voice. Although in many instances of social research, ‘qualitative researchers who use written texts as their materials do not try to follow any predefined protocol in executing their analysis’ (Denzin and Lincoln 2008, p. 278), a formalised approach was followed here because of the fundamental role that documents have in developing an understanding of the experienced reality in the case study. This section examines the literature around document analysis as a method before presenting the detail on how it was applied to this research.

Analysing documents is a valuable method in qualitative research, if currently underused. As Prior states, ‘writing plays such a large part in everyday culture’. Documents, including text and images, are artefacts of social settings and policy frames and as such are hugely useful in understanding meaning and aspirations. As May writes, documents ‘have the potential to inform and structure the decisions which people make on a daily and longer-term basis’ and ‘tell us about the aspirations and intentions of the periods to which they

refer’ (May 2011, pp. 191-192). Documents therefore form part of the meaning that we attribute to actions and activities in the social world.

The terms ‘document’ reflects a ‘very broad spectrum of perspectives and research sources’ (May 2011, p. 216) including public and private documents, electronic documents, photographs and even interview transcripts. For many authors (e.g. May, Antaki, Prior, Yanow) the starting point in social research has been a focus on the ‘collection and analysis of document content’ (Prior 2008, p. 479), the so-called ‘generic discourse analysis’ that Antaki refers to as a ‘working procedure’ as opposed to a practice based on ‘a strong commitment’ to epistemology or ontology (Antaki 2008, p. 433). Focussing on documents as sources of information in this way enables the writing and images to be ‘scoured for appropriate data’ and is well established in the social sciences (Prior 2008, p. 480). The style of writing can provide a good deal of information about the social fashions of the time, and the organisation(s) that produced them.

A profound, exhaustive approach has emerged in recent literature (see Prior 2008, May 2011 and Yanow 2013). Although everyday life is full of documents, they could be ‘seen as being somewhat divorced from action - as something static, immutable and isolated from human deed’ (Prior 2008, p. 479). Merely analysing their content tells the researcher little about their impact, and for this matter, it is important to understand that the meaning within a document comes to life through the act of being read, and the meaning that the reader attributes to the content. While Scott (1990) cited in (May 2011, pp. 206-207) talked of authenticity, credibility, representativeness and meaning, for contemporary

authors, the examination of meaning extends the analysis. May (2011)

provides some useful questions to ask when analysing the document such as; • What is the relationship between the various sections of the document?

• What is the relationship of the text to those who constructed it?

• What is the relationship of the text to other texts?

Therefore, key to an interpretive analysis of a document is an examination of reasons why the document was written and any difference between the meaning the author intended to produce and the received meanings as constructed by the audience in differing social situations.

A second important element of this extended form of document analysis is recognition that a document’s meaning will differ according to the audience and the expectations or understanding they have of it. For example, two people could read a passage of text and interpret it in completely different ways. As Yanow suggests it is not for the analysis to discern an objective reality i.e. which viewpoint may be the correct one, but to interpret a document through the lens of those reading it, i.e. the standpoint of the meaning-maker (Yanow 2013b). This allows the researcher an insight to ‘their ‘experienced reality’ – on how those arguments are experienced by those making and hearing them and how they become ‘factual’ reality to them’ (Yanow 2013b, p. 12).

Thinking about the use and function of documents, it was important to understand the origin and purpose of the document, particularly as many of those from government sources will have been written to gain public support, represent a position of power, or establish consensus in the way transport

systems are planned, delivered and managed in the city. How the documents link and relate to each other is another important element of analysis, even considering how they are hyperlinked together on the internet, including cross- organisational networks (Prior 2008).

The codes to be used in document analysis were the same as for analysing the interview transcripts (for more information see Section 4.8).

Document analysis as described was crucial in responding to the research questions. It provided the researcher with a sound understanding of the context within which the case study is located, and crucial evidence of the decision- making process. There is a need to relate data collected through this method to other data; there is a need to triangulate the data collected from different

methods in order to check the accuracy of the respondent’s view of reality by other observations (Silverman 2010). For example, ‘a policy project could begin with government documents whose official, collective meanings might be

contrasted with residents’ understandings of those policies, the latter generated through interviews’ (Schwartz-Shea and Yanow 2012, p. 83). This point is of direct relevance here and justifies the choice of both document analysis contrasted with interviews to address certain research questions.

Another type of document analysis was undertaken using social media and blog posts. While blog posts are similar in characteristic to a newspaper article or opinion piece, Twitter or Facebook posts are shorter, can include photographs or images. In all, 132 Facebook posts were reviewed and 1261 Twitter posts were analysed. Facebook posts were transferred manually into a Word document where they could be read, coded and translated. The Twitter posts

were downloaded into an Excel spreadsheet where they could be reviewed. Following certain organisations and people on Twitter, such as the Mayor, the head of the Metro organisation and civil society organisation was also useful to understand when key events were happening, such as radio interviews or public events and to identify other organisations with which to arrange interviews, for example a civil society organisation called ‘Ciudadana

Responable’ was located via Twitter posts and later followed on Facebook.

This was the approach for document analysis within this research.

Interviews

Interviews are common, if not overused, social science method (Rapley 2004), although according to Atkinson, perhaps under-analysed (pers comm).

Interviews in social science research take a range of forms including structured, semi-structured and group and most commonly take the form of face-to-face interchange (Fontana and Frey 2000). This section discusses the benefits of each type by way of justifying the predominant type used in this research, which are semi-structured interviews (with structured interviews used for RQ3a).

Interviews were an important method for this study. One of the Research Questions of the study was to identify the extent to which social exclusion, particularly transport-related social exclusion, is intensified by current

approaches to providing mass transport systems in developing country cities. Ideally, it would be possible to observe what people do in such a situation, but given the themes involving rights, which are themselves social constructs, it is not possible to observe activity to find out what happens in under a rights-based approach. It is the understanding and meanings attributed by those involved

that are the crucial elements of this research design. i.e. a rights-based

approach to decision-making is not something that can be observed, it must be felt and known and for that reason, interviews were used in this study.

Interviews were also used to validate intentions against actions i.e. to validate government intentions specified in policy documents against practice. Yanow states (2013b, p. 13) that when conflicts arise between word and deed, it is the deed that we tend to ‘trust’ as the more accurate reflection of what the actor actually means. This explains why this research design includes a cross comparison of documents produced by government bodies against interviews with residents.

The challenge at the start of fieldwork was contacting the relevant individuals, but a starting point was the academics and government agencies with whom the researcher had links. Through academic contacts the researcher had links with FLACSO, the Ecuadorian branch of the Latin American Faculty for Social Sciences (Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales), and with the Instituto de la Cuidad, a research organisation funded by the Municipio del Distrito Metropolitano de Quito. Another method was to use the social media networks of Facebook and Twitter to identify groups and individuals interested in participatory governance or mobility issues in the city and follow their

discussions. Given the high profile nature of the case study project, it was easy to find interviewees with a viewpoint. Interviews were conducted at a variety of locations in the city centre, mainly in the offices of government or community representatives.

The following sections describe the main characteristics of the interviews deployed during the fieldwork.

Structured interviews

The benefits of structured interviews are numerous: due to their specified set of questions asked in a prescribed order, they are replicable across a large

number of respondents and can be completed by a range of interviewers as the interviewer’s role is relatively neutral (Bryman 2001). As May states (2011, pp. 132-133), ‘the theory behind this method is that each person is asked the same question in the same way so that any differences between answers are held to be real one as a result of the deployment of a method and not the result of the interview context itself’.

Questions are mainly of a fixed choice type i.e. including yes or no answers, or responses picked from a list of options. The sequence of questions is set and not deviated from (Fontana and Frey 2000). Another common type of question is the scaled response question whereby the interviewee expresses an opinion by selecting a point along a scale such as excellent to very poor along a five- point scale (Rapley 2004). This type of open question will invariably lead to a range of responses that can then be grouped in the analysis according to theme, e.g. time or cost. Additionally, the role of the interviewer is minimised due to a ‘standardisation of explanation, leaving little room for deviation from the schedule; eliciting only the responses of the person with whom the interview is being conducted, not prompting or providing a personal view, not interpreting meanings’ and not improvising (May 2011, p. 133).

Structured interviews were useful to gather data on people’s current experience in accessing public transport, by asking them how they normally travel to school or work, for example. These types of questions are largely factual, based on repeated daily actions and for most people. Respondents were asked their opinion about mass transport systems that they use on a routine basis, therefore, they already had an opinion and by answering the questions they were merely re-telling it, as if it were a story, rather than cogitating to arrive at an opinion or new thought.

The responses of the structured questionnaire were comparable due to their standardised nature which supported a degree of generalisation, but the responses lacked depth in that answers were short. Given that the interview schedule is inflexible, data is only collected on the questions asked and it is not possible to explore interesting themes as they develop through tangents

(Rapley 2004).

Questionnaire survey of 70 bus users

At the start of the research, short structured interviews (i.e. surveys) were undertaken with 70 transport users recruited at public transport stations, on the bus network or at community centres where it was possible to gain access to a large number of bus users. This enabled the researcher to identify the extent to which transport-related social exclusion is intensified by current approaches to providing mass transport systems in developing country cities. The questions focused on the different dimensions of social exclusion being exhibited in the city (RQ3a) and how the current practice of planning and operating mass transport systems affect the lives of socially excluded people and communities

(RQ1). Table 4.2 contains an outline of the questions asked which was designed to be done in the shortest amount of time but reveal useful information.

Table 4.2. Interview guide for structured interviews.

INTERVIEW GUIDE

Introduce self Date/time

Permission to undertake survey Setting Purpose of study Respondent

Observations Your journey today

Origin, Destination, Mode, Interchange, Wait time, Total journey time, Cost

Problems faced when travelling by public transport – which of these do you face, and which is the most significant issue.

Availability, Affordability, Connectivity, Safety, Distance On a normal day, do you have difficulty reaching any of these locations via public transport?

Work, High school, Hospital/clinic, Police stations, Library, Visiting family, Post office

Are you….?

A student / A single parent / Looking for work / Retired / A person with disabilities / A full time carer / The head of the household

This interview guide was tested in a pilot week to assess its applicability to the situation, e.g. whether respondents could be recruited and whether the

interviews could be conducted in the short amount of time that they can spare. In addition, permission was needed from transport operators for the interviews to take place on board their vehicles or at stations that they own.

For information on coding and analysis, please see Section 4.8.

Semi-structured interviews:

This form of interview was used to explore research themes and had enough structure in the interview schedule to allow the researcher to follow the main theme of the research, but enough flexibility to allow explore respondents’ opinions in depth. Semi-structured interviews contain ‘questions (which) are normally specified but the interviewer is freer to probe beyond the answers’ in a way that appears contrary to the aims of standardisation and comparability (May 2011, p. 134). As Wengraf states, the prepared questions are sufficiently open that the ‘subsequent questions of the interviewer cannot be planned in advance but must be improvised in a careful and theorized way’ (Wengraf 2001, p. 5). The interview therefore takes a discursive form with the interviewer able to seek elaboration of the answers given (for example, ‘why do you think that happened?’ or ‘can you elaborate a little further?’) (May 2011), it is clear that the interviewer wants to explore the viewpoints of the interviewee, rather than simply note them down (as with structured interviews).

Semi-structured interviewing is quite common, for example, in many work environments or on television news programmes and as such most lay people would anticipate this form of questioning when invited to participate. This means that semi-structured interviews are a method that many people,

particularly government officials will feel comfortable with, and therefore at ease in divulging information. As with other interview techniques, the nature of the interview and the way in which the questions were asked and answered should be kept fairly standard for interviewees with similar perspectives (May 2011).

As a method, semi-structured interviews can complement documentary

analysis, because by asking people questions, it is possible to understand what respondents really understand and believe, and so gain the story behind the published words. This was important for this research design as, although document and social media analyses were important elements of the research, relying solely on the published word would have presented an unbalanced view of the world.

The semi-structured style was chosen, given the need to stay close to the research questions and an intuitive sense that the issues of rights and justice would not automatically emerge in discussions without the researcher offering a steer, given the potential to explore in-depth answers (rather than short ‘yes/no’ answers) and the valuable ability to pick up on themes as they emerged.

It was important to speak to several groups of interviewees: national

government for their links to the Ecuadorean constitution and national policy, city government for their awareness of local policy and implementation, and community groups for a sense of how practice affects them and what they understand to be the motivations of both tiers of government. The ‘civil society’ interview group included people or organisations who represent community interests, such as non-governmental organisations who may be promoting better decision making through participation. Representatives of these groups were able to offer a valuable overview of the mobility challenges faced by either one socio-economic section of society e.g. single mothers, or people living in a certain geographic location of the city e.g. on the periphery. There were a relatively limited number of people in each group who could

comment on the rights-based focus of this thesis, but those contacted gave valuable information.

In addition, twelve business owners directly affected by the metro proposals were interviewed to understand whether they had been included in the decision- making processes and how their business might be affected by the metro.

Table 4.3 gives the numbers of respondents interviewed and themes explored with each interview group.

Table 4.3. Semi-structured interviews

Participant group Number of interviewees Themes explored City Government – Department of Mobility 2 One officer One Councillor

• Current practice in planning and operating mass transport systems.

• Transport practices in the city – is there a problem? / whose roles and responsibilities to solve.

• Impacts on the socially excluded.

• Measures of effectiveness, equity, participation and accountability in decision-making.

• What additional activity might be required in order to achieve compliance with the constitutional demand? City Government –

Deputy Mayor’s office 2

One officer One Councillor

• The socially excluded in the city, challenges faced and impacts from current practice in planning and operating mass transport systems.

• Transport practices in the city – is there a problem? / whose roles and responsibilities to solve.

• Measures of effectiveness, equity, participation and accountability.

• What additional activity might be required in order to achieve compliance with the constitutional demand. Community

representatives

3 • Role of transport in daily lives/ challenges faced